THOUGHTS ON RADICAL ATHEISM

In one of their most poignant exchanges the Dude confronts the Big Lebowski about the fact that his trophy wife had actually kidnapped herself and about the Big Lebowski’s scheme to use the situation as a pretext to hide a substantial amount of money using the Dude as his patsy. The Dude said: “All you needed was a sap to pin it on, and you’d just met me. You thought, hey, a deadbeat, a loser, someone the square community won’t give a shit about.” In characteristic fashion the Big Lebowski replies, “Well? Aren’t you?” The Dude, appearing to be flummoxed by this unexpected confession, responds, “Well. . . yeah.” The Dude is nothing, if not honest.

The same cannot be said for radical atheists that purport to espouse the intellectual position but in actuality are little more than posers who fail the test of a true philosophy because they lack intellectual honesty. Radical atheists assert a position of so-called truth by wielding the sword of empiricism to challenge people of faith to prove something that science will never be able to prove. By assuming this position the radical atheists are essentially asserting that empiricism is the only form of true knowledge while remaining in denial about the limits of empiricism to explain the full spectrum of the reality in which humanity lives, and moves, and has their being.

If they were intellectually honest, and remained true to the position of empiricism, they would adhere to a philosophy of agnosticism, in recognition of the fact that empiricism cannot be used to either prove or disprove the existence of a transcendental being. If they were intellectually honest, they would be able to see and acknowledge that their position remains just as much faith based as those whom they criticize as being non-intellectual.

Whatever one might think about the Apostle Paul, he demonstrates a pristine form of logic in 1 Corinthians 8 when he discusses the reality and significance of idols. Paul states that they are really nothing and eating meat that is sacrificed to idols has no substantive meaning. Radical atheists might do well to embrace such logic.

However, that is not likely to happen simply because this type of pristine logic also results in a conclusion that efforts to prove the non-existence of a transcendental being also have no substantive meaning. Logic indicates that a true atheist would reach their conclusions based on whatever evidence they choose to pay attention to and then move on to invest their time and energy pursuing those things which might substantively enrich their lives. Certainly, the lifespan of most Homo sapiens is too short to be wasted commiserating over a non-existent being and could be better spent on things which may be more empirically based.

Logic suggests that radical atheists are not really atheists at all but are more like the Big Lebowski, pursuing some sort of hidden scheme or agenda that is not immediately apparent. That agenda is hinted at in an article by the author John Gray appearing in The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/15/society. The central thesis of this article is that radical atheism is evangelical in nature and tends to mirror the faith that it rejects. One of John Gray’s more poignant conclusions is that “The attempt to eradicate religion…only leads to it reappearing in grotesque and degraded forms”.

John Gray addresses the folly and foibles represented by the thought processes among these evangelical sort of atheists, exploring the subject of atheism from both scientific, philosophical and historical perspectives, and pointing out the fact that “In today’s anxiety about religion, it has been forgotten that most of the faith-based violence of the past century was secular in nature.”

In the view of John Gray, attempts to repress religion are like attempts to repress sex, a self-defeating enterprise. In fact he clearly states the opinion that “A credulous belief in world revolution, universal democracy or the occult powers of mobile phones is more offensive to reason than the mysteries of religion, and less likely to survive in years to come.”

If John Gray is correct, then radical atheism is a futile enterprise and it’s proponents are to be pitied above all men. Their efforts are not based on true reason, and they lack the intellectual honesty expressed by the Dude. At least he was able to recognize and acknowledge his own shortcomings.